Binary opposites in Buddhism—such as saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, emptiness and luminosity, ignorance and wisdom, and scores more—have been the stuff of debates since Śākyamuni Buddha first preached in Sarnath. He himself became the subject of a central binary: on his parinirvāṇa, did he dissipate into nonexistence, or does he abide as a luminous universal principle? It's an age-old dialectic of presence and absence that cuts to the heart of Buddhist metaphysics and is particularly relevant for buddha-nature theory. Similarly, over the centuries, teachers have explored multiple ways of explaining the relationship between ordinary deluded beings and fully perfect buddhas; at the moment of our enlightenment, will we be transformed, or will our true nature be revealed? Is something that isn't here now somehow produced? Do we share a common nature with the buddhas, or are we fundamentally different from them? The Buddha may have proposed a middle way between binary dualism, but there's a lot of disagreement about where that middle falls.
Buddha-nature theory seems to have been initially offered as one such middle way, a previously missing link between extremes offered by the Madhyamaka and Yogācāra schools of Mahāyāna doctrine. On the one hand was a theory of emptiness that was so extreme that, many argued, certain meditative practices were undermined. On the other hand was a theory of mind that proposed a permanently existent consciousness, an idea that was accused of violating the Buddhist doctrines of impermanence and no-self. In its earliest appearances buddha-nature was vague, more poetry than theoretical principle, hinting at possible interpretations and promising salvation for all without necessarily explaining much. But as the doctrine grew in popularity, debate lines developed. It has been categorized as provisional and definitive, defined as emptiness as well as luminosity, labeled Madhyamaka, Yogācāra, or neither, as it has been tugged one way and the other across the middle ground.
To better understand what the debate lines are and where the great thinkers in Buddhist history have stood, the following outlines the various binaries that appear in buddha-nature theory. Each is briefly introduced, with suggestions for further reading. Great Buddhist thinkers who populate this website, as well as scriptures and classic works of doctrinal exegesis, are presented with a checklist of positions.
Universal or Limited[edit]
Not all scriptures agree that buddha-nature is universal. Texts such as the Laṅkāvatārasūtra and the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra describe a class of beings (gotra) called the icchantika, who are so degraded through their lust and ignorance that they can never become enlightened. Such is the case only in the earliest version of the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra, however; the later version teaches the universality of buddha-nature, and all but one tradition has rejected the category. The exception was the Faxiang school (法相宗) of the great Chinese translator Xuanzang 玄奘 (born 602), which declined only a few generations after Xuanzang's death. Even without the icchantika on the scene, however, not all Buddhist schools accept the universality of buddha-nature. The Yogācāra theory of classes of beings divides beings into three basic categories determined by their potential liberation; only those belonging to the bodhisattva class will attain complete and perfect buddhahood, while those of the "disciple" (śrāvaka) and "solitary buddha" (pratyekabuddha) classes will attain the lesser enlightenment of the arhat. These beings cannot be said, therefore, to possess buddha-nature the same as the bodhisattvas. In some Buddhist traditions the universality of buddha-nature is taken to include even inanimate objects such as grass and trees and even roof tiles. The logic here is that buddha-nature is identical to the dharmakāya, the truth-body of the buddha, which is the true nature of all phenomena.
Universal
People with this position
Chapa Chökyi Senge
1109 ~ 1169
Chomden Rikpai Raldri
1227 ~ 1305
Drolungpa Lodrö Jungne
11th century
Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen
1292 ~ 1361
Fourth Shamarpa Chodrak Yeshe
1453 ~ 1524
Gyalse Tokme Zangpo
1295 ~ 1369
Gyaltsap Je Darma Rinchen
1364 ~ 1432
Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Taye
1813 ~ 1899
Jayānanda
11th century ~ 12th century
Kamalaśīla
713/740 ~ 763/795
Marpa Dopa Chökyi Wangchuk
1042 ~ 1136
Minyak Lama Yeshe Dorje
14th Century
Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab
1059 ~ 1109
Sabzang Mati Paṇchen Lodrö Gyaltsen
1294 ~ 1376
Sangpuwa Lodrö Tsungme
14th Century
Tanak Rinchen Yeshe
13th Century ~ 1345/1346
Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje
1284 ~ 1339
Longchen Rabjam
1308 ~ 1364
Texts with this position
The first Tibetan commentary written on the Uttaratantra by the translator of the only extant Tibetan translation of the treatise. Furthermore, since the author is also the namesake of the Ngok tradition (rngog lugs) of exegesis of the Uttaratantra, known for its analytic take on the work, this text was highly influential in the conception of a uniquely Tibetan approach to the Uttaratantra and the notion of buddha-nature.
Commentary on the Uttaratantra by a preeminent Geluk scholar that was a chief disciple of the school's founder, Tsongkhapa, as well as the Sakya scholar Rendawa Zhönu Lodrö, an outspoken critic of the treatise.
One of only two extant Sanskrit texts that comment on the Uttaratantra, this highly original work by Sajjana presents a contemplative approach to Maitreya's treatise from an author that was the veritable source for the Tibetan exegetical traditions spawned by his students Ngok Loden Sherab and Tsen Khawoche.
A lengthy polemical work by Dölpopa that addresses various disputed philosophical positions. Pön Jangpa sent Dolpopa some polemical writings with a measure of gold as gift asking him to send him response. In response, Dölpopa wrote this treatise explaining how self-emptiness as many Tibetan scholars understood is not the ultimate truth but buddha-nature endowed with buddha qualities is.
A polemical work defending the other-emptiness view of the Jonang tradition that addresses the criticism of this position by other Tibetan schools. This discursive text discusses the provisional or ultimate nature of the three turnings of the wheel of dharma, the position of Indian masters and philosophical schools, the intent of the Mahāyāna sūtras and the rebuts the criticism of other-emptiness by proponents of the self-emptiness theory in Tibet.
A fairly brief work by Tāranātha on the basic tenets of the four systems of Buddhist philosophy, namely the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntrika, Cittamātra, and Madhyamaka. His exposition culminates with a presentation of the Great Madhyamaka, the pinnacle of the four, which is synonymous with other-emptiness as represented by the Jonang tradition.
One of the so-called tathāgatagarbha sūtras that features teachings on buddha-nature. In this text buddha-nature is possessed by all sentient beings and is described as luminous and pure. It is also attributed characteristics, such as being permanent, eternal, everlasting, peaceful, and a self, that echo the four perfect qualities (guṇapāramitās) often ascribed to the dharmakāya when it is treated as a synonym for buddha-nature. It also connects tathāgatagarbha to the notion of a single vehicle and asserts the definitive nature of the buddha-nature teachings in general and within this sūtra in particular.
The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra is one of the main scriptural sources for buddha-nature in China and Tibet. Set around the time of Buddha's passing or Mahāparinirvāṇa, the sūtra contains teachings on buddha-nature equating it with the dharmakāya—that is, the complete enlightenment of a buddha. It also asserts that all sentient beings possess this nature as the buddhadhātu, or buddha-element, which thus acts as a cause, seed, or potential for all beings to attain enlightenment. Furthermore, the sūtra includes some salient features related to this concept, such as the single vehicle and the notion that the dharmakāya is endowed with the four pāramitās of permanence, bliss, purity, and a self.
It may be noted that there are three different texts with similar titles in the Chinese and Tibetan canons. Of the three Tibetan texts with Mahāparinirvāṇa in their title, a short one (Derge Kanjur, No. 121) called Āryamahāparinirvāṇasūtra contains prophecies of events in the centuries after the Buddha's Mahāparinirvāṇa but has nothing on buddha-nature. Thus, this is not the Mahāparinirvāṇāsūtra which is considered as a Tathāgatagarbhasūtra. The two which deal with buddha-nature are Mahāyānasūtras and contain detailed accounts of the final teachings of the Buddha. The first sūtra, the longer one covering two volumes of Derge Kanjur (mdo sde Nya and Ta) is a translation from Chinese while the second one is a translation from Sanskrit. They appear to be two different recensions of the same original sūtra as they have similar titles and overlapping content. However, the one translated from Chinese is much longer and also contains information on the events after the Buddha entered Mahāparinirvāṇa.
Instruction by Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab written as a letter of advice on Buddhist practice framed as a formal correspondence to one Gatön Sherab Drak and other monks. Ngok Lotsāwa covers many topics in his advice from thinking of death and impermanence, cultivating enthusiasm, compassion, bodhicitta, etc., following the discipline and good teacher to cultivating the crop of Buddha's qualities having moistened the seed of buddha-nature by the rain of learning coming from the cloud of one's master. He advises monks to follow the words of Nāgārjuna and understand the notion of emptiness beyond existence and non-existence.
One of the more prominent sūtra sources for the Ratnagotravibhāga, this text tells of the story of Śrīmālādevī taking up the Buddhist path at the behest of her royal parents based on a prophecy of the Buddha. It includes mention of important concepts related to the teachings on buddha-nature, such as the single vehicle and the four perfections, or transcendent characteristics, of the dharmakāya. It also mentions the notion that buddha-nature, which is equated with mind's luminous nature, is empty of adventitious stains but not empty of its limitless inseparable qualities. In his commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāga, Asaṅga quotes this sūtra more than any other source text. In particular, it is considered a source for the fifth of the seven vajra topics, enlightenment.
A rather brief work that, as Tsering Wangchuk states, is "the earliest extant Tibetan commentary on the Uttaratantra that cites both tantric and sutric sources to corroborate the claims made in the treatise."
This work presents a late (14th century) Kadampa view on the Ratnagotravibhāga and the associated buddha-nature teachings by an influential representative of this tradition, often referred to as "the second Asaṅga" (thogs med gnyis pa).
Dumowa Tashi Özer's commentary on the
Uttaratantra that is based on the
Third Karmapa’s topical outline or summary (
bsdus don).
A detailed explanation of the Uttaratantra written by one of Dölpopa's chief disciples.
Dölpopa's commentary on the Uttaratantra, which, although it doesn't actually use the term "other-emptiness", is an important precursor and source to the formulation of his unique Zhentong view found in his seminal work Mountain Dharma: An Ocean of Definitive Meaning (ri chos nges don rgya mtsho).
Thrangu Rinpoche met Khenpo Gangshar in the summer of 1957 when Khenpo Gangshar went to Thrangu Monastery in eastern Tibet. While there, Khenpo Gangshar gave these instructions, which are a distillation of the essential points ofthe practices of both mahamudra and dzogchen. Later they were written down, first in a very short form and then as the slightly longer text known as "Naturally Liberating Whatever You Meet." What makes them so beneficial for our time is that Khenpo Gangshar presents them in a way that is easy for anyone to understand and put into practice. (Source:
Vivid Awareness, Translator's Introduction, pp. IX-X)
Tāranātha's lineage supplication to the other-emptiness Madhyamaka tradition that was preserved by the Jonang school. Tāranātha traces the origin of the other-emptiness to the Buddha, who passed it down through Maitreya, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu to Maitripa or from Vasubandhu through Sthiramati, Guṇamāti, et al. to Maitrīpa, or from Buddha through Vajrapaṇi, Rahulabhadra, Nāgārjuna, Śabari, Maitrīpa, from Maitrīpa through Anandakīrti, Ratnakaraśānti, Sajjṇāna, Anandavajra, then in Tibet through Tsen Khawoche, et al. until Tāranātha.
Limited
People with this position
Butön Rinchen Drup
1290 ~ 1364
Dratsepa Rinchen Namgyal
1318 ~ 1388
Ratnākaraśānti
late-10th century ~ early-11th century
Rongtön Sheja Kunrik
1367 ~ 1449
Sakya Paṇḍita
1182 ~ 1251
Śākya Chokden
1428 ~ 1507
Texts with this position
In Sanskrit, “Entrance to the Middle Way” (translated also as “Supplement to the Middle Way”); the major independent (as opposed to commentarial) work of the seventh-century Indian master
Candrakīrti, who states that it is intended as an avatāra (variously rendered as “primer,” “entrance,” and “supplement”) to Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. The work is written in verse, to which the author provides an extensive prose commentary (bhāṣya). The work is organized around ten “productions of the aspiration to enlightenment” (bodhicittotpāda), which correspond to the ten stages (bhūmi) of the bodhisattva path (drawn largely from the Daśabhūmikasūtra) and their respective perfections (pāramitā), describing the salient practices and attainments of each. These are followed by chapters on the qualities of the bodhisattva, on the stage of buddhahood, and a conclusion. (Source: The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 489.)
An extensive explanatory commentary on the
Uttaratantra by one of the major scholastic voices of the Sakya school. As Bernert states, "Refuting, on one hand, the notion that Buddha-nature is synonymous with mere emptiness, and on the other that the mind is inherently endowed with the Buddha qualities, Rongtön argues for an understanding of Buddha-nature that embraces both aspects of the nature of mind: cognizance and emptiness." (Christian Bernert.
Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature, 2018.
Provisional or Definitive[edit]
Buddhist scholars classify all doctrine as either definitive or provisional. Concepts and statements are deemed definitive when they accurately describe reality. Those that do not, or require considerable interpretation, but are nonetheless of practical value, are provisional. Buddha-nature has generated considerable controversy since the theory was first developed in the early centuries of the Common Era. Some commentators have suggested that the concept was initially offered as a palliative for those who feared emptiness as taught by the Mahāyāna. It was also a guarantee for those who might be dissuaded from a path to salvation that was said to take near-infinite lifetimes to traverse. As such, the concept was plainly intended as a provisional teaching, an encouragement to those on and not yet on the path, but not actually true. Yet buddha-nature scriptures are remarkably vague, allowing for a wide range of definitions and interpretations. Beginning in the eleventh century with the popularity of Ratnagotravibhāga, the famous commentary on the buddha-nature sūtras, theorists began to debate over whether the scriptures were to be taken as definitive or provisional. Candrakīrti, like most Indian Madhyamaka philosophers, deemed tathāgatagarbha to be provisional, for it did not conform to their standard teachings on emptiness- a position that was furthered by most Tibetan scholars of the Sakya and Geluk traditions. On the other hand, early Kadam scholars, such as Ngok and Chapa who were also staunch Mādhyamikas, took buddha-nature to be definitive by equating it directly with the emptiness taught as the ultimate in Madhyamaka philosophy. This view of tathāgatagarbha as definitive was also shared by certain Sakya scholars that inherited Ngok's scholastic tradition, as well by Tibetans that gravitated toward the other-emptiness (zhentong) interpretation of Madhyamaka, such as those of the Kagyu and Jonang traditions, as well as many Nyingma scholars that took both the second and third wheel teachings to be definitive in nature.
Provisional
People with this position
Butön Rinchen Drup
1290 ~ 1364
Candrakīrti
c. 570 ~ c. 640
Dratsepa Rinchen Namgyal
1318 ~ 1388
Jayānanda
11th century ~ 12th century
Kamalaśīla
713/740 ~ 763/795
Khedrup Je Gelek Palzang
1385 ~ 1438
Rendawa Zhönu Lodrö
1349 ~ 1412
Sakya Paṇḍita
1182 ~ 1251
Texts with this position
In Sanskrit, “Entrance to the Middle Way” (translated also as “Supplement to the Middle Way”); the major independent (as opposed to commentarial) work of the seventh-century Indian master
Candrakīrti, who states that it is intended as an avatāra (variously rendered as “primer,” “entrance,” and “supplement”) to Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. The work is written in verse, to which the author provides an extensive prose commentary (bhāṣya). The work is organized around ten “productions of the aspiration to enlightenment” (bodhicittotpāda), which correspond to the ten stages (bhūmi) of the bodhisattva path (drawn largely from the Daśabhūmikasūtra) and their respective perfections (pāramitā), describing the salient practices and attainments of each. These are followed by chapters on the qualities of the bodhisattva, on the stage of buddhahood, and a conclusion. (Source: The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, 489.)
Definitive
People with this position
Bötrul Dongak Tenpai Nyima
1898 ~ 1959
Chapa Chökyi Senge
1109 ~ 1169
Chomden Rikpai Raldri
1227 ~ 1305
Dumowa Tashi Özer
c. 15th Century
Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen
1292 ~ 1361
Fourth Shamarpa Chodrak Yeshe
1453 ~ 1524
Gyalse Tokme Zangpo
1295 ~ 1369
Gyaltsap Je Darma Rinchen
1364 ~ 1432
Gö Lotsāwa Zhönu Pal
1392 ~ 1481
Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Taye
1813 ~ 1899
Jñānaśrīmitra
975/980 ~ 1025/1030
Marpa Dopa Chökyi Wangchuk
1042 ~ 1136
Minyak Lama Yeshe Dorje
14th Century
Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab
1059 ~ 1109
Rongtön Sheja Kunrik
1367 ~ 1449
Sabzang Mati Paṇchen Lodrö Gyaltsen
1294 ~ 1376
Sangpuwa Lodrö Tsungme
14th Century
Śākya Chokden
1428 ~ 1507
Tanak Rinchen Yeshe
13th Century ~ 1345/1346
Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje
1284 ~ 1339
Longchen Rabjam
1308 ~ 1364
Texts with this position
One of only two extant Sanskrit texts that comment on the Uttaratantra, this highly original work by Sajjana presents a contemplative approach to Maitreya's treatise from an author that was the veritable source for the Tibetan exegetical traditions spawned by his students Ngok Loden Sherab and Tsen Khawoche.
The first Tibetan commentary written on the Uttaratantra by the translator of the only extant Tibetan translation of the treatise. Furthermore, since the author is also the namesake of the Ngok tradition (rngog lugs) of exegesis of the Uttaratantra, known for its analytic take on the work, this text was highly influential in the conception of a uniquely Tibetan approach to the Uttaratantra and the notion of buddha-nature.
Commentary on the Uttaratantra by a preeminent Geluk scholar that was a chief disciple of the school's founder, Tsongkhapa, as well as the Sakya scholar Rendawa Zhönu Lodrö, an outspoken critic of the treatise.
A lengthy polemical work by Dölpopa that addresses various disputed philosophical positions. Pön Jangpa sent Dolpopa some polemical writings with a measure of gold as gift asking him to send him response. In response, Dölpopa wrote this treatise explaining how self-emptiness as many Tibetan scholars understood is not the ultimate truth but buddha-nature endowed with buddha qualities is.
A polemical work defending the other-emptiness view of the Jonang tradition that addresses the criticism of this position by other Tibetan schools. This discursive text discusses the provisional or ultimate nature of the three turnings of the wheel of dharma, the position of Indian masters and philosophical schools, the intent of the Mahāyāna sūtras and the rebuts the criticism of other-emptiness by proponents of the self-emptiness theory in Tibet.
A fairly brief work by Tāranātha on the basic tenets of the four systems of Buddhist philosophy, namely the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntrika, Cittamātra, and Madhyamaka. His exposition culminates with a presentation of the Great Madhyamaka, the pinnacle of the four, which is synonymous with other-emptiness as represented by the Jonang tradition.
One of the so-called tathāgatagarbha sūtras that features teachings on buddha-nature. In this text buddha-nature is possessed by all sentient beings and is described as luminous and pure. It is also attributed characteristics, such as being permanent, eternal, everlasting, peaceful, and a self, that echo the four perfect qualities (guṇapāramitās) often ascribed to the dharmakāya when it is treated as a synonym for buddha-nature. It also connects tathāgatagarbha to the notion of a single vehicle and asserts the definitive nature of the buddha-nature teachings in general and within this sūtra in particular.
One of the more prominent sūtra sources for the Ratnagotravibhāga, this text tells of the story of Śrīmālādevī taking up the Buddhist path at the behest of her royal parents based on a prophecy of the Buddha. It includes mention of important concepts related to the teachings on buddha-nature, such as the single vehicle and the four perfections, or transcendent characteristics, of the dharmakāya. It also mentions the notion that buddha-nature, which is equated with mind's luminous nature, is empty of adventitious stains but not empty of its limitless inseparable qualities. In his commentary on the Ratnagotravibhāga, Asaṅga quotes this sūtra more than any other source text. In particular, it is considered a source for the fifth of the seven vajra topics, enlightenment.
This work details instructions on the Ratnagotravibhāga that Maitrīpa reportedly received directly from Maitreya in a dream, which he then later retrieved, in actuality, discovering the text concealed within in a stūpa. Mönlam Tsultrim, the attributed Tibetan author of this work that lived centuries later, thus claims that he copied and edited this work from the original manuscript that was passed down in a lineage coming from Maitrīpa, himself.
A rather brief work that, as Tsering Wangchuk states, is "the earliest extant Tibetan commentary on the Uttaratantra that cites both tantric and sutric sources to corroborate the claims made in the treatise."
This work presents a late (14th century) Kadampa view on the Ratnagotravibhāga and the associated buddha-nature teachings by an influential representative of this tradition, often referred to as "the second Asaṅga" (thogs med gnyis pa).
Dumowa Tashi Özer's commentary on the
Uttaratantra that is based on the
Third Karmapa’s topical outline or summary (
bsdus don).
A detailed explanation of the Uttaratantra written by one of Dölpopa's chief disciples.
Dölpopa's commentary on the Uttaratantra, which, although it doesn't actually use the term "other-emptiness", is an important precursor and source to the formulation of his unique Zhentong view found in his seminal work Mountain Dharma: An Ocean of Definitive Meaning (ri chos nges don rgya mtsho).
An extensive explanatory commentary on the
Uttaratantra by one of the major scholastic voices of the Sakya school. As Bernert states, "Refuting, on one hand, the notion that Buddha-nature is synonymous with mere emptiness, and on the other that the mind is inherently endowed with the Buddha qualities, Rongtön argues for an understanding of Buddha-nature that embraces both aspects of the nature of mind: cognizance and emptiness." (Christian Bernert.
Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature, 2018.
Thrangu Rinpoche met Khenpo Gangshar in the summer of 1957 when Khenpo Gangshar went to Thrangu Monastery in eastern Tibet. While there, Khenpo Gangshar gave these instructions, which are a distillation of the essential points ofthe practices of both mahamudra and dzogchen. Later they were written down, first in a very short form and then as the slightly longer text known as "Naturally Liberating Whatever You Meet." What makes them so beneficial for our time is that Khenpo Gangshar presents them in a way that is easy for anyone to understand and put into practice. (Source:
Vivid Awareness, Translator's Introduction, pp. IX-X)
Tāranātha's lineage supplication to the other-emptiness Madhyamaka tradition that was preserved by the Jonang school. Tāranātha traces the origin of the other-emptiness to the Buddha, who passed it down through Maitreya, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu to Maitripa or from Vasubandhu through Sthiramati, Guṇamāti, et al. to Maitrīpa, or from Buddha through Vajrapaṇi, Rahulabhadra, Nāgārjuna, Śabari, Maitrīpa, from Maitrīpa through Anandakīrti, Ratnakaraśānti, Sajjṇāna, Anandavajra, then in Tibet through Tsen Khawoche, et al. until Tāranātha.
Emptiness or Luminosity[edit]
The binary of luminosity and emptiness represents a fundamental Buddhist debate over using cataphatic or apophatic language—that is, whether one can use positive language to describe reality or whether one must always use the language of negation. Emptiness theory posits that there is ultimately no permanent or independent nature to any phenomena, be it physical or mental. Yet scriptures also teach that the mind itself is naturally luminous, such as in the Perfection of Wisdom, where one reads that "in its essential original nature, thought is transparently luminous." In luminosity theory, the stains of saṃsāra do not defile the mind but only cloud its true nature, and enlightenment is simply a revealing of what is already there. Luminosity is a key factor in tantra, where a direct experience of the mind's luminosity is a goal. In rejecting such affirmative descriptions of mind, teachers such as Haribhadra and Sakya Paṇḍita have reconciled this binary by relegating luminosity to provisional status—language which is used to teach and which is not completely accurate. But others such as Vasubandhu and Nāropa maintained that luminosity is the actual characteristic of mind and is therefore not to be regarded as empty.
What Is Buddha-Nature?[edit]
Since the notion of tathāgatagarbha wasn't drawn from a single scriptural source nor predicated on the views of a single philosophical school or movement, there is no universally accepted definition of what buddha-nature actually is or is not. Rather, there developed many different approaches to this topic based on how buddha-nature was interpreted from a variety of philosophical perspectives. Below are some of the major positions taken on buddha-nature and the individuals who supported them.
Emptiness That Is a Nonimplicative Negation (without enlightened qualities)
- This position refers to the sheer emptiness that most classical Mādhyamikas subscribe to. The emptiness that is a nonimplicative negation also corresponds to what became known as the rangtong view, in that its referent is empty of an inherent or intrinsic nature. Proponents of this view typically hold the second turning of the Dharma wheel to be the most definitive.
People with this position
Abhayākaragupta
11th century ~ circa 1125
Drolungpa Lodrö Jungne
11th century
Gyaltsap Je Darma Rinchen
1364 ~ 1432
Kamalaśīla
713/740 ~ 763/795
Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab
1059 ~ 1109
Sakya Paṇḍita
1182 ~ 1251
Emptiness That Is an Implicative Negation (with enlightened qualities)
- This position refers to an emptiness that when denying the existence of one thing implies the presence of another. This corresponds to what became known as the zhentong view, in which buddha-nature is empty of adventitious defilements but not empty of enlightened qualities. Proponents of this view typically hold the third turning of the Dharma wheel to be the most definitive.
People with this position
Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen
1292 ~ 1361
Fourth Shamarpa Chodrak Yeshe
1453 ~ 1524
Sabzang Mati Paṇchen Lodrö Gyaltsen
1294 ~ 1376
Tanak Rinchen Yeshe
13th Century ~ 1345/1346
Texts with this position
A lengthy polemical work by Dölpopa that addresses various disputed philosophical positions. Pön Jangpa sent Dolpopa some polemical writings with a measure of gold as gift asking him to send him response. In response, Dölpopa wrote this treatise explaining how self-emptiness as many Tibetan scholars understood is not the ultimate truth but buddha-nature endowed with buddha qualities is.
A polemical work defending the other-emptiness view of the Jonang tradition that addresses the criticism of this position by other Tibetan schools. This discursive text discusses the provisional or ultimate nature of the three turnings of the wheel of dharma, the position of Indian masters and philosophical schools, the intent of the Mahāyāna sūtras and the rebuts the criticism of other-emptiness by proponents of the self-emptiness theory in Tibet.
A fairly brief work by Tāranātha on the basic tenets of the four systems of Buddhist philosophy, namely the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntrika, Cittamātra, and Madhyamaka. His exposition culminates with a presentation of the Great Madhyamaka, the pinnacle of the four, which is synonymous with other-emptiness as represented by the Jonang tradition.
Tāranātha's lineage supplication to the other-emptiness Madhyamaka tradition that was preserved by the Jonang school. Tāranātha traces the origin of the other-emptiness to the Buddha, who passed it down through Maitreya, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu to Maitripa or from Vasubandhu through Sthiramati, Guṇamāti, et al. to Maitrīpa, or from Buddha through Vajrapaṇi, Rahulabhadra, Nāgārjuna, Śabari, Maitrīpa, from Maitrīpa through Anandakīrti, Ratnakaraśānti, Sajjṇāna, Anandavajra, then in Tibet through Tsen Khawoche, et al. until Tāranātha.
Mind's Luminous Nature
- This position refers to those that assert that buddha-nature is the luminous nature of the mind itself.
People with this position
Chomden Rikpai Raldri
1227 ~ 1305
Gö Lotsāwa Zhönu Pal
1392 ~ 1481
Jñānaśrīmitra
975/980 ~ 1025/1030
Marpa Dopa Chökyi Wangchuk
1042 ~ 1136
Ratnākaraśānti
late-10th century ~ early-11th century
Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje
1284 ~ 1339
Texts with this position
One of only two extant Sanskrit texts that comment on the Uttaratantra, this highly original work by Sajjana presents a contemplative approach to Maitreya's treatise from an author that was the veritable source for the Tibetan exegetical traditions spawned by his students Ngok Loden Sherab and Tsen Khawoche.
Dumowa Tashi Özer's commentary on the
Uttaratantra that is based on the
Third Karmapa’s topical outline or summary (
bsdus don).
Unity of Emptiness and Luminosity
- This position refers to those who assert that realization derives from the reconciliation of the ultimate and relative truths as the unity of appearance and emptiness. Proponents of this view typically hold the second turning and third turning of the Dharma wheel to be equally definitive.
People with this position
Bötrul Dongak Tenpai Nyima
1898 ~ 1959
Gorampa Sönam Senge
1429 ~ 1489
Longchen Rabjam
1308 ~ 1364
Texts with this position
Instruction by Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab written as a letter of advice on Buddhist practice framed as a formal correspondence to one Gatön Sherab Drak and other monks. Ngok Lotsāwa covers many topics in his advice from thinking of death and impermanence, cultivating enthusiasm, compassion, bodhicitta, etc., following the discipline and good teacher to cultivating the crop of Buddha's qualities having moistened the seed of buddha-nature by the rain of learning coming from the cloud of one's master. He advises monks to follow the words of Nāgārjuna and understand the notion of emptiness beyond existence and non-existence.
Thrangu Rinpoche met Khenpo Gangshar in the summer of 1957 when Khenpo Gangshar went to Thrangu Monastery in eastern Tibet. While there, Khenpo Gangshar gave these instructions, which are a distillation of the essential points ofthe practices of both mahamudra and dzogchen. Later they were written down, first in a very short form and then as the slightly longer text known as "Naturally Liberating Whatever You Meet." What makes them so beneficial for our time is that Khenpo Gangshar presents them in a way that is easy for anyone to understand and put into practice. (Source:
Vivid Awareness, Translator's Introduction, pp. IX-X)
Causal Potential or Disposition
- This position refers to those who assert buddha-nature to be the basic or primary cause for beings to attain enlightenment. It is a capacity that sentient beings share with buddhas that demarcates their inherent potential to become enlightened should they choose to embark upon the path. In this case buddha-nature is often equated with a disposition or hereditary trait, gotra, that guarantees the possibility of enlightenment.
People with this position
Texts with this position
One of Gampopa's most enduring works. It was one of the first "stages of the path" (lam rim) texts to be written by a Tibetan, after the genre was introduced by Atiśa through his famous composition Bodhipathapradīpa, The Stages of the Path to Enlightenment.
Resultant State of Buddhahood
- This position refers to those that assert that buddha-nature only exists in those who have already achieved enlightenment. Typically this means equating buddha-nature with the dharmakāya of a fully enlightened buddha.
People with this position
Butön Rinchen Drup
1290 ~ 1364
Dratsepa Rinchen Namgyal
1318 ~ 1388
Pakmodrupa Dorje Gyalpo
1110 ~ 1170
Texts with this position
The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra is one of the main scriptural sources for buddha-nature in China and Tibet. Set around the time of Buddha's passing or Mahāparinirvāṇa, the sūtra contains teachings on buddha-nature equating it with the dharmakāya—that is, the complete enlightenment of a buddha. It also asserts that all sentient beings possess this nature as the buddhadhātu, or buddha-element, which thus acts as a cause, seed, or potential for all beings to attain enlightenment. Furthermore, the sūtra includes some salient features related to this concept, such as the single vehicle and the notion that the dharmakāya is endowed with the four pāramitās of permanence, bliss, purity, and a self.
It may be noted that there are three different texts with similar titles in the Chinese and Tibetan canons. Of the three Tibetan texts with Mahāparinirvāṇa in their title, a short one (Derge Kanjur, No. 121) called Āryamahāparinirvāṇasūtra contains prophecies of events in the centuries after the Buddha's Mahāparinirvāṇa but has nothing on buddha-nature. Thus, this is not the Mahāparinirvāṇāsūtra which is considered as a Tathāgatagarbhasūtra. The two which deal with buddha-nature are Mahāyānasūtras and contain detailed accounts of the final teachings of the Buddha. The first sūtra, the longer one covering two volumes of Derge Kanjur (mdo sde Nya and Ta) is a translation from Chinese while the second one is a translation from Sanskrit. They appear to be two different recensions of the same original sūtra as they have similar titles and overlapping content. However, the one translated from Chinese is much longer and also contains information on the events after the Buddha entered Mahāparinirvāṇa.
Latent State of Buddhahood
- This position refers to those that assert buddha-nature is a latent form of enlightenment that is fully present in sentient beings but is obscured, and therefore inactive, at this stage of their development. In this sense, it is called buddha-nature when it has yet to manifest, and it is called enlightenment or buddhahood when it has been actualized.
People with this position
Chapa Chökyi Senge
1109 ~ 1169
Gyalse Tokme Zangpo
1295 ~ 1369
Minyak Lama Yeshe Dorje
14th Century
Rongtön Sheja Kunrik
1367 ~ 1449
Texts with this position
A rather brief work that, as Tsering Wangchuk states, is "the earliest extant Tibetan commentary on the Uttaratantra that cites both tantric and sutric sources to corroborate the claims made in the treatise."
Different Types of Tathāgatagarbha
- This position refers to those that assert multiple versions of buddha-nature that correspond to various stages of its manifestation. In other words, rather than asserting a single buddha-nature that applies to everyone, they divide it into different types that apply to specific circumstances.
People with this position
Sangpuwa Lodrö Tsungme
14th Century
Śākya Chokden
1428 ~ 1507
Tathāgatagarbha Was Taught Merely to Encourage Sentient Beings to Enter the Path
- This position refers to those that assert the teachings on buddha-nature are merely provisional. From this perspective buddha-nature teachings are just a tool utilized to coerce students in the right direction rather than being an exact representation of the way things truly are. In this case, those who subscribe to this view tend to suggest that buddha-nature was taught in order to alleviate fears of emptiness or of the tremendously time-consuming effort needed to traverse the path to enlightenment.
People with this position
Candrakīrti
c. 570 ~ c. 640
Jayānanda
11th century ~ 12th century
Potential or Already-perfected[edit]
The Tathāgatagarbhasūtra, one of the earliest scriptures on tathāgatagarbha, or buddha-nature, has the Buddha state that "all beings, though they find themselves with all sorts of kleśas—the adventitious stains—have a tathāgatagarbha that is eternally unsullied and that is replete with virtues no different from my own." The sūtra gives nine similes to describe that buddha-nature. These are:
- A buddha encased in a decaying lotus blossom
- Pure honey surrounded by a swarm of bees
- A kernel of wheat not yet removed from its husk
- A piece of pure gold fallen into a pit of waste
- Treasure hidden beneath an impoverished household
- The pit of a mango that can grow into a mighty tree
- A statue of pure gold concealed in rags
- A vile woman who carries in her womb the embryo of a great man
- A statue cast in gold still encased by its earthen mold
Of these, seven describe a perfect object that is obscured by something else. The object is unaffected by its obscuration, yet it is made either unknown to people, such as the treasure under the house, or rendered difficult to obtain, as in the case of the honey surrounded by bees. The message is that buddha-nature is already present, already perfected, yet obscured by the stains of ignorance, desire, and hatred. The similes of the mango pit and the noble child in the base woman's womb have a different message, however: both indicate a potential to transform into something that is not currently present. The noble being in the womb is only an embryo, and the pit merely carries the genetic material to grow into the tree. Whether buddha-nature is properly understood as an already-present perfection or a potential to attain that perfection is debated in terms of whether buddha-nature can be defined as the natural luminosity of the mind or whether it is the same as emptiness, and therefore must not be said to exist as an independent phenomenon. If the former, then the obscurations that conceal that natural luminosity need only be removed in order to attain liberation, for one's buddhahood is already present. If the later, then that buddhahood is not present and must be cultivated. Among those who take the position that buddha-nature is a potential, there are multiple avenues of explaining how the potential is actualized, with various terms to label buddha-nature in its various stages.
Madhyamaka or Yogācāra[edit]
Buddha-nature does not easily align with either Madhyamaka or Yogācāra doctrine, though it has been appropriated by members of both schools. The theory seems to have developed outside of either community in response to their assertions on the nature of reality and human nature, such that some scholars have posited the existence of a "Tathāgatagarbha school" of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism. The assertion of the existence of a buddha-nature that possesses characteristics conflicts with Madhyamaka teachings of the fundamental absence of all independent phenomena; that is to say, buddha-nature would appear to contradict emptiness theory. At the same time, the assertion of the universality of buddha-nature conflicts with Yogācāra theories that classify beings according to their potential for liberation. Nevertheless, both Madhyamaka and Yogācāra authors have employed various interpretive strategies to make it conform to their school's orthodoxy. Both were aided by the relatively late Laṅkāvatārasūtra, which in separate sections equated buddha-nature with both emptiness and the ālayavijñāna. The Tibetan custom of including the Ratnagotravibhāga as one of the Five Dharma Treatises of Maitreya, a group of core Yogācāra scriptures, further lends to the common belief that buddha-nature is a teaching of that school. However, Yogācāra never really gained a foothold in Tibet other than as part of some relatively short-lived attempts to establish a synthetic Yogācāra-Madhyamaka philosophy. Hence, there was considerable debate over how to classify the five Maitreya works in Tibet, as Yogācāra, characterized by the Mind-Only view (sems tsam), was generally considered inferior to Madhyamaka. Therefore, most Tibetan proponents of buddha-nature theory found ways to align it with Madhyamaka, while its opponents tended to dismiss it as a Yogācāra doctrine.
Analytic or Meditative Tradition[edit]
The Tibetan traditions generally divide the primary modes of exegesis on the Ratnagotravibhāga into two lines of transmission known as the analytic tradition (thos bsam gyi lugs) and the meditative tradition (sgom lugs). These two traditions originated with the Tibetan disciples of the Kashmiri master Sajjana—namely Ngok Lotsāwa and Tsen Khawoche, respectively. Therefore, these two are also commonly referred to as the Ngok tradition (rngog lugs), representing the scholarly or analytic approach, and the Tsen tradition (btsan lugs), representing the more practice-oriented, meditative approach. Though it is likely the diverging motivations of these two figures that would set the respective trajectories of these traditions, with Ngok as the aspiring scholar, translator, and heir apparent to Sangpu Neutok, one of the first major Tibetan scholastic institutions, on the one hand, and the elder Tsen looking to devote the rest of his life to practice and hoping to apply the teachings of the Ratnagotravibhāga in preparation for his own death, on the other. In terms of the official stances of these traditions, they are typically associated with the above debates over emptiness or luminosity, which pits philosophical reasoning against yogic experience. Thus we see the analytic tradition branch out from Ngok's base of Sangpu Neutok, an institution that evolved in association from the Kadam to the Sakya and finally the Geluk school, all stalwarts of the classical Madhyamaka philosophy that would come to be associated with the rangtong position. Likewise, the meditative tradition would become a vehicle for the practical instructions on the treatise that would feed into and bolster the experiential approaches of the Mahāmudrā teachings, as well as the more positivistic position of zhentong Madhyamaka that would take root in the Kagyu and Jonang schools.
Analytic Tradition
People with this position
Butön Rinchen Drup
1290 ~ 1364
Chapa Chökyi Senge
1109 ~ 1169
Minyak Lama Yeshe Dorje
14th Century
Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab
1059 ~ 1109
Rongtön Sheja Kunrik
1367 ~ 1449
Sakya Paṇḍita
1182 ~ 1251
Texts with this position
The first Tibetan commentary written on the Uttaratantra by the translator of the only extant Tibetan translation of the treatise. Furthermore, since the author is also the namesake of the Ngok tradition (rngog lugs) of exegesis of the Uttaratantra, known for its analytic take on the work, this text was highly influential in the conception of a uniquely Tibetan approach to the Uttaratantra and the notion of buddha-nature.
A lengthy polemical work by Dölpopa that addresses various disputed philosophical positions. Pön Jangpa sent Dolpopa some polemical writings with a measure of gold as gift asking him to send him response. In response, Dölpopa wrote this treatise explaining how self-emptiness as many Tibetan scholars understood is not the ultimate truth but buddha-nature endowed with buddha qualities is.
A polemical work defending the other-emptiness view of the Jonang tradition that addresses the criticism of this position by other Tibetan schools. This discursive text discusses the provisional or ultimate nature of the three turnings of the wheel of dharma, the position of Indian masters and philosophical schools, the intent of the Mahāyāna sūtras and the rebuts the criticism of other-emptiness by proponents of the self-emptiness theory in Tibet.
A fairly brief work by Tāranātha on the basic tenets of the four systems of Buddhist philosophy, namely the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntrika, Cittamātra, and Madhyamaka. His exposition culminates with a presentation of the Great Madhyamaka, the pinnacle of the four, which is synonymous with other-emptiness as represented by the Jonang tradition.
A rather brief work that, as Tsering Wangchuk states, is "the earliest extant Tibetan commentary on the Uttaratantra that cites both tantric and sutric sources to corroborate the claims made in the treatise."
Dumowa Tashi Özer's commentary on the
Uttaratantra that is based on the
Third Karmapa’s topical outline or summary (
bsdus don).
An extensive explanatory commentary on the
Uttaratantra by one of the major scholastic voices of the Sakya school. As Bernert states, "Refuting, on one hand, the notion that Buddha-nature is synonymous with mere emptiness, and on the other that the mind is inherently endowed with the Buddha qualities, Rongtön argues for an understanding of Buddha-nature that embraces both aspects of the nature of mind: cognizance and emptiness." (Christian Bernert.
Perfect or Perfected? Rongtön on Buddha-Nature, 2018.
Meditative Tradition
People with this position
Chomden Rikpai Raldri
1227 ~ 1305
Gö Lotsāwa Zhönu Pal
1392 ~ 1481
Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Taye
1813 ~ 1899
Marpa Dopa Chökyi Wangchuk
1042 ~ 1136
Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje
1284 ~ 1339
Texts with this position
One of only two extant Sanskrit texts that comment on the Uttaratantra, this highly original work by Sajjana presents a contemplative approach to Maitreya's treatise from an author that was the veritable source for the Tibetan exegetical traditions spawned by his students Ngok Loden Sherab and Tsen Khawoche.
Instruction by Ngok Lotsāwa Loden Sherab written as a letter of advice on Buddhist practice framed as a formal correspondence to one Gatön Sherab Drak and other monks. Ngok Lotsāwa covers many topics in his advice from thinking of death and impermanence, cultivating enthusiasm, compassion, bodhicitta, etc., following the discipline and good teacher to cultivating the crop of Buddha's qualities having moistened the seed of buddha-nature by the rain of learning coming from the cloud of one's master. He advises monks to follow the words of Nāgārjuna and understand the notion of emptiness beyond existence and non-existence.
One of a series of short texts by the Kadam scholar Kyotön Mönlam Tsultrim, which represent an intersection between the works of Maitreya, particularly the Ratnagotravibhāga, and the practical instructions of Mahāmudrā.
Thrangu Rinpoche met Khenpo Gangshar in the summer of 1957 when Khenpo Gangshar went to Thrangu Monastery in eastern Tibet. While there, Khenpo Gangshar gave these instructions, which are a distillation of the essential points ofthe practices of both mahamudra and dzogchen. Later they were written down, first in a very short form and then as the slightly longer text known as "Naturally Liberating Whatever You Meet." What makes them so beneficial for our time is that Khenpo Gangshar presents them in a way that is easy for anyone to understand and put into practice. (Source:
Vivid Awareness, Translator's Introduction, pp. IX-X)
Tāranātha's lineage supplication to the other-emptiness Madhyamaka tradition that was preserved by the Jonang school. Tāranātha traces the origin of the other-emptiness to the Buddha, who passed it down through Maitreya, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu to Maitripa or from Vasubandhu through Sthiramati, Guṇamāti, et al. to Maitrīpa, or from Buddha through Vajrapaṇi, Rahulabhadra, Nāgārjuna, Śabari, Maitrīpa, from Maitrīpa through Anandakīrti, Ratnakaraśānti, Sajjṇāna, Anandavajra, then in Tibet through Tsen Khawoche, et al. until Tāranātha.
Explore more
On this site
Explore
Read and watch academic presentations, interviews, books, and articles.
Go deeper
